论文部分内容阅读
在现代思想谱系中,不仅马克思系统地阐发了其资本双重性理论,而且蒲鲁东、西美尔等人也提出了对资本积极性和消极性的理解。但是,相似形式的背后,却是三种资本双重性理论的原则区别,具体体现在:(1)各自得出资本双重性结论的世界观前提不同,(2)各自对资本双重性历史内涵的阐发不同,(3)各自提出的克服由资本双重性造成的现代生产生活异化状态的社会改造方案不同。划清三者的界限,对于准确把握马克思的历史唯物主义和辩证法思想、清除“《货币哲学》是《资本论》续篇”的流俗见解等等,具有重要的学术意义。
In the pedigree of modern thought, not only Marx systematically expounded its theory of capital duality, but also Proudhon, Simmel and others proposed the understanding of the enthusiasm and negativity of capital. However, behind the similar form, they are the principle differences between the three theories of capital duality, which are embodied in the following aspects: (1) Different preconditions of world view that each draw conclusions about the duality of capital; (2) Their respective elucidation of the historical connotation of the duality of capital (3) The social reform programs each proposed to overcome the alienation of modern production and life caused by the dual nature of capital are different. To draw a clear line between the three has important academic significance for accurately grasping Marx’s historical materialism and dialectical thinking and for removing the popular philosophy of “monetary philosophy” as the “sequel to capital”.